Northwest Voices; A sampling of readers' letters, faxes and e-mails Opinion Northwest Voices 1252 Words 01 August 2003 The Seattle Times Fourth B7 ALL BETS ARE OFF Terror futures market is just one index of Bush's sinking stock Editor, The Times: We accepted the election. We cashed the tax-refund check. We looked the other way while Enron helped write our energy policy. We supported the president in the grim days after 9-11, though now it appears more may have been known than was told to us. We gritted our teeth as the wars on terror and in Afghanistan were left unfinished. We waved the flag as we invaded Iraq to rid the world of WMDs that no longer seem important. But only now, with the aborted, government-sponsored "Terror Futures Market," is it fully revealed that the Bush administration's tenuous connection to reality has finally unraveled and begun to sink into a surreal, Mad Magazine outer level of hell ("Another weird idea from Adm. Poindexter," Times editorial, July 30). Are we really to believe that the people in power, educated people, would sign off on this idea? That "investors" could legitimately earn money on the suffering of others? Would people have been encouraged to invest their new $400-per-child tax refund in their kids' 529 college accounts, heavily weighted with "October Tel Aviv suicide bombings growth funds" or "Springtime Colombian political assassination mutual funds"? Did this really sound like a sane idea to Adm. John M. Poindexter and Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfield? Is Bush even paying attention, or was this just another way to "Bring 'em on"? Jim Sander, Seattle Sneaky preview How's this for a scenario: A guy named Rich Investor with, shall we say, moral flexibility, bets $5 million that the Alaskan oil pipeline will be hit by terrorists within 60 days. This isn't likely to happen, so the odds are 50 to 1 against and he stands to win $250 million if the event happens. It's day 58 and nothing has happened. So Rich Investor calls his buddies who share his own moral flexibility and tells them that it's time for Plan B. They arrive on day 59 at some remote part of the Alaskan oil pipeline and stage their own terrorist attack, causing enough damage to spark a national emergency. Rich Investor gets his money, his "terrorists" get theirs, and the White House cackles with glee. "See boys, this almost worked! Let's do it some more!" Sounds like Hollywood? You won't have to pay to see this one. Scot Ranney, Bellingham Portfolio diversity Sure, betting on disasters is a grim idea, apparently too much for the public to swallow. We are not used to the idea of openly predicting and betting on dangers. It is not PC. We do know and accept that insurance companies predict chances of death or injury on the roads, or at home, and of a house fire, earthquake, flood, tornado, etc. But even the insurance "industry" (a for-profit, calculating, betting operation) won't cover the event of war, or a terrorist event... not yet, anyway. The good news here is, we are finally getting around to admitting publicly that it's a dangerous world out there. That it has been so for years. That terrorists are just a new danger to add to the list. Compared with our own self-inflicted deaths on the highways and with our own guns, the terrorists are still a small blip. We are also coming to understand that our dangerous world is due mostly to our own powerful technologies we have turned loose, like cars, planes, trucks, guns, explosives and a quick communications system. Pogo said it long ago, "We have met the enemy and he is us!" So I am hopeful it's just a matter of time 'til Bush and his buddies are exposed for what they are: political hustlers who benefit from fanning this new fear of terrorists. Jeff Douthwaite, Seattle Exclusive touts This new betting parlor proposed by the Pentagon, we're told, (was) designed to analyze the wisdom of the free market in predicting such things as major political upheavals around the world. It assumes that entities such as big oil, which can afford huge bets on futures, have more general intelligence than the hoi palloi that is the American people; that there is some substance to the general conservative misconception that wealth somehow is an indication of intelligence. Money will talk in determining military policy. Supposedly, "government agencies would not... have access to the identities or funds of traders." Give us a break and get real! This entire scheme (was) nothing more than a move to solidify the military-industrial complex. The Bush administration here (was) merely seeking some sort of validation/justification for its military forays. How about letting us commoners place some small bets on the unlikely possibility of national health care within the next five years, or the survival of the Social Security system past the year 2110? Why must our way of life revolve around the Pentagon and big-bet money interests? Tom Camfield, Port Townsend The closing bell The Bush administration clearly has lost focus. It keeps trying to find the convicted felon Poindexter something to do. How about sending him off to look for a real job. It's difficult to find a real job if you're a convicted felon. They think the "free market" is the cure to everything. I mean, any moron can see through this. Better look close, these crooks will deceive and lie to us for any reason whatsoever. They treat us with contempt and pander to our fears. Off with their heads in 2004. Dan Lavielle, Seattle